Introduction

Early childbearing is one of the major threats to young people’s1 2 health and socioeconomic well-being (eg, ability to remain in school and access to financial resources), potentially hindering their smooth transition into adulthood.3 4 Early childbearing has both immediate and lifelong consequences for young mothers and their children.5 6 Young women are at a higher risk of maternal mortality than older women.7 8 They are less likely to receive antenatal care, initiate antenatal care early or complete the recommended number of visits.8–11 Furthermore, the incidence of stillbirths and infant mortality is 50% higher among babies born to mothers younger than 20 years compared with those born to mothers aged 20–29 years.12 In addition to the heightened health risks, young mothers are more prone to social risks such as smoking and alcohol abuse,13 14 which elevate the likelihood of stillbirth, low birth weight and other health issues for their babies.15 16

When young women and girls become pregnant, their education is jeopardised, impacting their employability and overall contribution to the economy.17 For example, a report by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) shows that if 200 000 young mothers and girls in Kenya were employed instead of having become pregnant, it would inject an additional $3.4 billion into the economy annually.18 Besides health, educational and economic implications, pregnancy carries negative social repercussions for young women and girls. Young women and girls who become pregnant face stigmatisation, diminished social status within households and society, and early and forced marriage.19 The consequences of early childbearing also extend beyond them and reverberate through families, societies and economies—affecting family relationships and dynamics as they adapt to the presence of a new family member.20 21 Moreover, evidence by Ferraro et al indicates that early childbearing has intergenerational effects whereby children of young mothers are more likely to be young mothers themselves.22

Young fathers also face challenges that affect their health and socioeconomic well-being, although only little attention has been given to them.23–26 For instance, they are sometimes forced to drop out of school to support their child financially.24 26 27 Dropping out of school limits their employment opportunities and earnings, increasing the risks of persistent poverty levels and economic insecurity.24 28 In addition, young fathers who are unable to provide for their children may experience diminished self-esteem24 and may be denied access to their child by the child’s mother and her family.29 30 This in turn limits their involvement in the child’s life.26 Moreover, young fathers tend to experience greater psychological and emotional difficulties compared with their peers who are not fathers.30 Despite these mental health difficulties, they have limited emotional and psychosocial support compared with young mothers.26 Young fathers also face inadequate family support, with some experiencing hostility and punitive measures from their parents.27 30 Similar to young mothers, early childbearing tends to be intergenerational among young fathers.31

Prioritising the well-being of young parents (mothers and fathers) will not only yield individual advantages but also contribute to far-reaching positive effects for broader societal outcomes, making it a strategic investment.32 Existing research on young parents in Africa has predominantly focused on comprehending their experiences and pinpointing potential support interventions.19 33 34 The few reviews of interventions targeting young parents have primarily centred on psychosocial interventions,35–37 as well as interventions aimed at preventing repeat pregnancies.38 39

While these prior studies are important, no study, to the best of our knowledge, has systematically mapped interventions aimed at improving the health and socioeconomic well-being of young parents in the African context, where the burden of early childbearing is particularly high. Given the interconnectedness of cultural, social and economic factors that mould the experiences of young parents on the continent, we seek to systematically map and synthesise existing interventions aiming to improve their health and socioeconomic well-being. By doing so, we aim to generate insights to inform future programmes and policy interventions tailored to this subpopulation of young people.

MethodsStudy design

This protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) standards.40 The protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) at the University of York, UK. The registration number is CRD42023464828.

Search strategy

We will search six electronic databases—PubMed, Science Direct, AJOL, JSTOR, ERIC and Google Scholar—for published peer-reviewed articles. Additionally, we will review the reference lists of identified articles and review articles to identify additional articles. We will also search for grey literature through Google search and organisations’ websites. The inclusion of grey literature is because there is a likelihood of finding very few studies since there is limited attention on research focusing on parenting adolescents. We will limit our search to articles reporting on studies conducted within the African region. To ensure that we capture the most recent evidence on interventions targeting young parents, only articles published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2023 will be included. Moreover, there is a growing focus on interventions to support young parents given the median age at first birth for women in many African countries is below the age of 20,41 42 hence the need for recent evidence that can inform these programmes. References will be managed using Mendeley.

While the exact search terms will vary by database, we will structure our search around four key components/blocks: (1) interventions, (2) young parents (aged 10–24 years), (3) Africa and (4) health and socioeconomic well-being. These search terms will be adapted accordingly for every bibliographic database in combination with database-specific filters. We will employ Boolean operators (‘AND’, ‘OR’ and ‘NOT’) to maximise or narrow the specificity of the search. We will also use wildcards to search for any variations or alternate spellings of key concepts. We will place date, language (English and French) and age restrictions as part of our search criteria where applicable. The search strategies for the six databases are presented as an online supplemental document. The search will be guided by the PICOT (Population, Interventions, Comparison, Outcome and Time) framework as outlined in table 1.

Table 1

PICOT (Population, Interventions, Comparison, Outcome and Time) framework illustrating the scope of the systematic review

A preliminary search to test the search strategy was conducted in August 2023 and will be updated once the final search is concluded to align with the timelines indicated in table 1.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

We will include articles that meet the following criteria: (1) the article reports on a study where the participants are young mothers and/or fathers aged 10–24 years or include a broader age range but present disaggregated results for young parents aged 10–24 years, (2) the article reports on interventions targeting young parents in Africa or individual countries in Africa, (3) the article is published in English or French, (4) the article reports on health and socioeconomic outcomes, and (5) the article was published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2023. We focus on young parents aged 10–24 years because programme implementers tend to broaden the age range when programming for young mothers (ie, they include girls older than 19 years). Further, WHO and UNFPA define young people as those aged 10–24 years1 2 and so we considered anyone in that age range who has started childbearing as a young parent.

We will exclude articles if (1) the article reports on interventions that only target pregnant 10–24 year olds, (2) the article only reports on interventions targeting children of young parents, (3) the article reports on interventions aimed to improve pregnancy outcomes or (4) the full-text article is not accessible.

Study selection

A three-stage process will be used to identify articles that meet the inclusion criteria. First, we will remove all duplicate search results. Second, at least two independent reviewers will screen each article’s title and abstract to assess its suitability for inclusion using Rayyan software. Lastly, two reviewers will independently conduct a full-text review of all articles selected in the second stage. Should any disagreements arise in the second and third stages, we will resolve them through a consensus discussion with all the authors. We will use the PRISMA flow chart diagram to illustrate the study article selection process as shown in figure 1

Figure 1

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) flow diagram detailing the search and selection process.

Data extraction

Data from all the included studies will be extracted in a data extraction form created using Microsoft Excel software. Two studies (quantitative and qualitative) selected for inclusion will be used to pilot test the form and modify it, if necessary. Two reviewers will extract data independently from the two studies. The reviewers will then compare the contents of the data extraction of the two studies for uniformity and consistency before proceeding to the final data extraction.

Two reviewers will independently extract data from each article and cross-check the information to enhance reliability and minimise errors. Reviewers will extract information about the articles including the title of the study, authors, publication year, subregion, country, sample size, age of participants, gender of participants, participants’ marital status, study design, data type and study objectives. They will also extract information on the name and type of interventions and key findings on the effects of the intervention on the health and well-being of young parents in Africa. Discrepancies between reviewers will be resolved through team discussions and consensus.

Assessment of methodological quality of included articles

Two reviewers will independently assess the methodological quality of the included articles using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tool.43 The CASP tool provides a systematic process through which the strengths and weaknesses of a research study can be identified.43 The tool contains 10 key items, namely, (1) research aims, (2) research methodology, (3) research design, (4) recruitment, (5) data collection, (6) data analysis, (7) relationship between researcher and participants, (8) ethical considerations, (9) findings and (10) value of research. These 10 items are each scored using a three-point response scale (yes= ‘+’, no= ‘‒’, can’t tell=’?’). Based on the assessment, the articles are finally assigned ratings of high, moderate and low quality. Any discrepancies in these rankings will be resolved through team discussion.

Data analysis and synthesis

After completing the data extraction process, we will process, organise and summarise the data. We will then synthesise data using both quantitative and qualitative approaches. To present the findings of this study, we will use the PRISMA framework. We anticipate recording data on heterogeneous interventions from a wide range of study designs, hence, we will group data based on the type of intervention. Within these groups, we will create subgroups based on the outcome, study design, participant characteristics and general study features.

Qualitative analysis

We will adopt a qualitative analysis approach given our objective is to describe the interventions for improving the health and socioeconomic well-being of young parents in Africa. We will use thematic analysis to identify key patterns and findings in the data extracted from qualitative articles. We will create coding categories based on the systematic review’s objective and relevant data elements that inform it. To organise and process the data, we will use NVivo software for coding. During coding, the two reviewers will look for variations, differences or similarities in the results and classify data under the major subcategories. We will employ a narrative format to present findings on the interventions.

Patient and public involvement

We engaged stakeholders who have different expertise on young parents’ health and socioeconomic well-being to develop the study design, research questions and search strategies. The stakeholders were researchers and non-researchers with specialisations in sexual and reproductive health, mental health, nutrition, youth empowerment and education. We will continue consulting them during the refining of search strategies, article retrieval, screening of articles, data extraction, data synthesis, data analysis, report writing, manuscript writing and dissemination of the findings. No patients will be involved in this study given the study design.